Stronger legislation needed to curb drug addiction

How did this country, and the U.S., become such drug-addicted societies? A recent report states that the painkiller, Oxycontin, is now the number one drug used by addicts in North America. But whether it's this drug, crack cocaine, crystal meth, or others, the result is always the same: wasted lives, needless deaths, crime, and tons of taxpayers' money that should be used for productive purposes. It's a cop-out when Ministers of Health claim there's no easy answer.

What's appalling is how Oxycontin, so ill-used, is so easily available in Ontario alone. In 2008, provincial pharmacies dispensed prescriptions for Oxycontin that were more than double the national average. Then in 2009-10, the Ontario Drug plan processed 3.9 million opioid claims made by 776,000 people. The population of Ontario is just over 12 million! And this is just one province!

What's gone wrong? Some doctors prescribe Oxycontin for sprained ankles when less potent drugs would do. Addicts also locate doctors most likely to renew their prescriptions. But surely these doctors should be able to distinguish between addicted patients and those who have genuine need for a painkiller. If they don't, they should be retrained or lose their licenses.

Some argue this problem can be solved by more treatment centres, more trained personnel, improved housing, etc. I agree this is ideal, but it does nothing to stop the root cause of addiction, particularly easy access to illegal drugs.

What would work? Several years ago I interviewed drug officials in Singapore. I've never forgotten the two words they used to describe the incompetence of politicians in their country. They stated they had become "irresponsibly permissive."

Years ago, Singaporean politicians committed the same sin. Drug traffickers were allowed free range and heroin addiction became a major problem for young people. But Singapore had a visionary President, Lee Kuan Yew, who took drastic action to stop the trafficking of heroin. Lee Kuan Yew introduced the death penalty for major drug traffickers. Lesser drug offences were punishable by caning.

But the government also realized this policy was doomed to failure if drugs continued to be easily available. So drug infected areas were flooded with police 24 hours a day for up to nine months. Addicts were picked up and sent to treatment centres. Major drug dealers were hung, others imprisoned.

Drug dealers quickly got Lee Kuan Yew's message. The new laws were harsh and police intended to carry them out. In effect, never show your teeth if you're not prepared to bite.

I've heard ad nauseam that harsh punishment does not deter crime. This is the perpetual cry of do-gooders. Singapore officials retorted that only five percent of those who were caned became repeat offenders. Even Aristotle, the father of medicine, preached that "punishment is a form of medicine."

Our politicians who have no idea how to curb drug addiction should visit Singapore. It would be tax dollars well spent. En route, they would get the first powerful message when a small immigration card is handed to them aboard the plane prior to landing. It warns, "Death to drug traffickers."

While in Singapore, they would not see the disgusting drug scene that has become a part of so many North American cities, where drug dealers dispense their illegal wares in broad daylight and others inject themselves on the street with impunity with whatever drug is available.

I can already hear the critics howling "blue murder" about the Singapore solution. But they need not worry, as it will not happen in North America. Unfortunately, there is no Lee Kaun Yew who has the vision and intestinal fortitude to enact tough legislation. Rather, we have officials who cannot see the medical and social chaos of a "no action" plan. We cannot cure all those addicts who are now a part of our society. But the Singapore plan could stop their cancerous growth.